UK royals sue French magazine over Kate’s photos
Britain’s royal family began legal action against a French magazine on Friday for a “grotesque” breach of privacy after it published topless photographs of Prince William’s wife Kate Middleton.
Celebrity gossip magazine Closer published a dozen shots of the Duchess of Cambridge on holiday in southern France as she slipped off her bikini top, relaxed on a sun lounger and at one point pulled down the back of her bikini bottoms while William rubbed sun cream on her lower back.
“St James’s Palace confirms that legal proceedings for breach of privacy have been commenced today in France by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge against the publishers of Closer Magazine France,” the couple’s office said in a statement.
A court in Nanterre near Paris said the royal couple’s lawyer had filed a motion to expedite the procedure and Closer’s publishers would be heard on Monday.
Under the headline “Oh my God!”, the photos show the couple, whose regal yet natural conduct since their April wedding has won them fans worldwide, soaking up the sun on the balcony of a 19th century hunting lodge, oblivious to lurking paparazzi. The spread is a blow to Buckingham Palace as it tries to move on from a scandal over naked shots of Prince Harry that tarred an image bolstered by William and Kate’s wedding, the Queen’s 2012 Diamond Jubilee and her Olympic Games appearance.
While Closer defended its decision to publish the photographs, a royal spokesperson said it had upset the royal couple, who are currently touring south-east Asia. “Their Royal Highnesses have been hugely saddened to learn that a French publication and a photographer have invaded their privacy in such a grotesque and totally unjustifiable manner,” a spokesperson for St James’s Palace said. British Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokeswoman also said the royal couple should be entitled to their privacy.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 16th, 2012.
Like Life & Style on Facebook and follow at @ETLifeandStyle for the latest in fashion, gossip, entertainment
COMMENTS (11)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1732569774-0/Baymax-(2)1732569774-0-165x106.webp "article")
@Ralph... Y dont u keep your clothes on while taking shower...
@Ralph: You should keep your mouth closed.
She should keep her clothes on.
@Ali Zaid: Freedom of expression is not relevant here. First, it's not an opinion, it's someone's pictures that have been published without prior concent. Also, they may have gotten away with it if she was walking like that on the street. But as she was inside a private property it was a clear case of breach of someone's privacy. There are laws in Europe regarding this And especially in the UK the laws governing this are taken very seriously and celebs in the past have claimed hundreds of thosauds of pounds in compensation.
The French magazine has published the pictures under Freedom of Expression. Why getting boiled?
@P: i love kate but just to prevent tgis kinda thing , she is a princess and these things will happent i just dont understand why kate didnt put bikini top on knowing this could happen
From a grammar website:
Personally, I would tend to use "oblivious of" if the person had no knowledge of something which they had no way to be aware of..... "Sam was walking along the tracks completely oblivious of the train approaching from behind him" ... but I would use "oblivious to" if the person had knowledge but was choosing to totally ignore it.... "Sam dashed across the tracks to snatch the baby from in front of the train, completely oblivious to the danger in which he was putting himself".
So I think what I'm saying is that if the person is "absent-mindedly" involved I'd use "oblivious of" and if they're "raptly" engaged in something else, then I'd use "oblivious to".
I also had the reaction that the article should have said "oblivious OF lurking paparazzi". "oblivious TO lurking paparazzi" implies that they were aware the pictures were being taken, but didn't care. That's clearly NOT the theme of the article.
The best answer is for "Closer" to pull the franchise from the current French holders and, if possible, get the publisher fired. This will never stop until the press stops paying huge sums for this sort of photo. The press will never stop paying huge sums until people refuse to buy the publications that carry the offending pictures. The press does it because it sells. Welcome to human nature.
I read with dismay the article in today's paper that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's privacy has been invaded. I am absolutely appalled by this grotesque case of voyeurism. The editor's rationalization that the terrace looked out onto a public road is ridiculous. Apparently the photos were blurry,so it is obvious that they were taken from a long distance away using a telescopic lens.
Im surprised that the Royals didn't consider suing with Harry's naked photos! They could have sued their own security gaurds. In any way I think that the Royals are a spoilt bunch and have no place in a modern democratic society.